I'd go with evil.


And also...has Shyru posted in this thread yet...it seems his sort of thread....

I am lead to beleive that shyriu was banned during the downtime for impersonating KingJolly at the D'arq Cathedral. I think we need an official post about it, I have said it so many times.

no it is just suicidal that saying is. And I don't want to die and neither do you.



Join my army and we can overtake this island and then the WORLD.

i'd much rather be unintelligent and a good person, rather than being highly intelligent and the purest living incarnation of evil.

5animals, so you mean evil and smart vs. good and stupid?

In that case, I would choose to be stupid cuz evil people don't go to heaven.

(And no I'm not trying to sound cute, I honestly believe in an afterlife).

A lot of you are choosing to be evil, but why? When you're evil, you can't love. What's the point of life if you don't feel those warm beautiful emotions and only strive for brief and superficial enjoyments like sadism and high social status?

Isn't love the most precious thing in all existence? The deepest treasures in life are felt by good people so I'd rather be stupid and still capable of feeling love than being evil and not.

I'm a over thinking this? Cuz it addresses a question about being stupid or evil but "stupid" and "evil" aren't really related to each other. Good and Evil, yes, Smart and Stupid, yes, but Stupid and Evil... That is unbalanced unless u definitely mean "stupid AND good" vs. "evil AND smart." Again if that's the case, I'd be stupid because being evil, I think, is even stupider than being mentally stupid.

5animals, why would you be evil if u had to make a choice? So you'd rather be a heartless maniac than someone dumb but capable of share a sweet cuddly night under moonlight with me?

Think about it. You lose more than you gain from being evil

Did u guys see that episode of SpongeBob where Patrick became super intelligent but couldn't have so much fun because of his lack of emotions but when he became stupid again he started laughing and having crazy fun with Spongebob again? My point is... "fun" is the thing we all pursue, right? Well, being stupid, but GOOD, still lets u have loads of fun because your goodness opens you up to the "good" things in life, get it?

Simply being evil restricts one from having maximum pleasure, and it also clouds good judgement, like what Kombatveteran said. I agree with him.

I agree with what you said about 'When you're evil, you can't love. What's the point of life if you don't feel those warm beautiful emotions and only strive for brief and superficial enjoyments like sadism and high social status'
However even though i'd rather die than be evil, it feels good to be evil to be evil is to submit to one's pure plesures its a great feeling but wrong . thats why poeple chose it. SIN FOR THE SAKE OF SIN. another reason for poeple the become evil in the island is because they would sacriface everything for knowlege. i would like to say i would do the same in the pursuit of knowlege but the pain might be to much for me to bare. . "In that case, I would choose to be stupid cuz evil people don't go to heaven" That is why I will never be evil. i believe faith is the most precious thing in all existence. faith of love, faith happyness and faith of God

QueenSindel(thebitch)- I think if you read the previous posts form me I cover some of your questions already. I wil reiterate. It is not a matter of the two things being related, it is simply a matter of which flaw you would take if you had to have one or the other. In other words, which thing would be worse, in your mind, to be. It is not to say that the two are related whatsoever. Do you see what I mean?

I suppose this would be a good time to address a few things and explain my own personal opinion.

I realy don't believe that an evil person could not feel love. Hitler had love once (or at least beleived that he did) and he was almost unquestionably the most evil person of modern times. Evil does not nescesarily mean emotionless (that would more accurately qualify as sociopathic) and love is not exclusively a good thing. I think it would be easy to imagine an evil person caring about those close to him in exclusion, they simply would not have an altruistic view of the world, and would likely care about themselves more. (which is a trait that many egoist, see also americans have as well) Often love can lead a person to many evil and violent actions of unto itself. To reference what others have said. How can you say that evil clouds judgement, I would argue that emotioin and stupidity would cloud judgement equaly as much as a lack of morals or a desire to do harm to others would. Again I would state that love clouds the judgement more than anything ever, so realy your moral disposition does not change that in my mind.

Here is the reasoning for my choice:

This world is not an altruistic and easy place to live in, perhaps there is an afterlife, but "this" world is tough. There realy are only two types of beings in this world, predators and prey. This is not to say that all predators are evil or that all prey is good, but it comes down to basic fight or flight reactions if that makes sence to you. We can clearly see this in nature. Now given the fact that I likely wouldn't get very far in this world if I was stupid I would consider myself to be prey, and frankly I cannot live with that. Further more I think there are many examples of well meaning yet idiotic people who have harmed others in this world.

This question was realy meant to be a no win scenario that I was presenting to all of you in order to get to know all of you a little better. I was judging your reactions more than your answers and in that regard it succeeded pretty nicely.

Now given that this world is not so black and white as this question would make one beleive, I have the option to be both good and intelligent, and I feel fortunate for that. However if push came to shove and I was faced with a difficult choice, I would choose survival over spiritual purity, innocence, or morality. That is simply the nature of the beast that I am, and I beleive that almost any other would make the same choice if they were being honest with themselves. In all actuality I am more kindred to a rebel than an oppresor so this question is hard for me to answer as well. I have absolutely no desire to be in controll of the world or others. I would rather just be left to my own devices. I suppose that this is probably a form of evil of unto itself (apathy perhaps, or simply the unwillingness to sacrifice for others) I often forge my own path without regard to the oppinons of others, and I am sure that many of you are the same.

It should be noted that none of this is not meant to be an insult to anyone, it is simply food for thought that is meant to make you put more thought into your own views. Anyone who knows me well is aware that I like to play devils advocate in an intellectual situation.

Edit: I forgot to mention one point. If you are motivated to do good out of a desire to go to heaven or fear of reprocussions (such as law or hell) that is not actualy being good. That is simply an act of gaining what you desire, which would qualify as nuetral or even evil unto itself. Just more food for thought.

i'd like to add that many evil things have done in the name of love and fear
I.E. anakin skywalker transformation to darth vader and the rule of ide amine.

Ugg....I don't mean to be a jerk, but you were doing so well up untill right there. Sighting something from fiction only cheapens the very valid points that you make. You would have done better to talk about the many murders commited by family members and the hate crimes commited against people of different sexual preferences and races. I do agree with your points though.

and that is why I can't be a "jedi"



Too emotionless for my taste.

Joining your army is unnessary, for I am ThePredator, and you "DeathScepter"...are my weapon of mass destruction...

We have the island my friend, we have...the island.

Mwhahahahaa!



I couldn't have said it any better my man......just different. I agree on So many levels it's ridiculous. Haha

But isn't love or "being loving" what seperates good people from bad people? And aren't sociopaths labeled sociopathic because of their "evil" attitudes and those wrongdoings they commit?


Love does not lead to violence. It is purely a positive, harmless thing. If love is converted into jealousy (greed), then it can lead to evil, but on its own, it cannot. That would be an oxymoron since love is believed to be the greatest goodness of emotions and life.

Greed is what ultimately leads to evil.


Because since good people have the emotional capacity to feel supreme pleasures of the heart, it is poor judgement to choose a life of brief and superficial enjoyments instead of enjoyments with depth and long-lasting impact and meaning.

This is why I think being evil is stupider than being mentally stupid. Since evil is the mark of an utterly greedy heart, it means that person cannot romantically connect with other people since that would mean having to be loving, nice, giving, sharing, adoring of others.... everything evil isn't, which means they cannot love as profoundly and numerously as good people can because their greed limits their potential as far as their own heart and not anyone elses. It's true that evil people set an emotional barrier between themselves and the rest of people. That's why they're greedy.

(Am I making any sense? Cuz I can't tell)

Bottomline.... Their emotional pleasure cannot be as vast and versatile as a good person who can accumulate much more through being able to romanticize or emotionally bond with others (and not just people, but also with animals, nature, etc.).

Plus, if you're evil, you're ruled by greed. How can you make objective judgements if you're always influenced by the same thing?


This is true, and this is because nobody is perfect. Even Jesus himself hurt some people, for example, I'm sure, whether he meant to or not, he was not perfect. That doesn't mean he killed someone or caused others enormous pain like an evil person would attempt to, but I'm sure he at least bothered people or angered people sometimes (and I mean in his personal life, not his public haters at the time).

Harming people doesn't necessarily make you evil unless that's all you want to do in order to feel better, higher, etc. than everyone else.


I'm being honest, and I'd rather be stupid but with a sane soul, than smart with a putrid, demented, disgusting one.

And I like this thread, btw. Very stimulating for intellectuals, but it also shows how unfaithful so many people can be to goodness. No wonder the world is so cruel and negative. (No offense to you, btw, since I know you'd go evil if u had to make the choice).

I don't want to deal with cobbled html so I am going to manauly clip this.

-But isn't love or "being loving" what seperates good people from bad people? And aren't sociopaths labeled sociopathic because of their "evil" attitudes and those wrongdoings they commit?-

A sociopath is someone who feels no remorse for their actions, this does not mean they cannot know love. In fact I am not sure if they are truly evil so much as sick to be honest. They seem incapable of making certain choices, because they don't recognise the consequences the same as we do. Basicaly they are moraly handicapped. I think the truth is that all the rest of us use our conscience and it tells us what is right or wrong. And in this you have broken down the very essence of morality. What is right and wrong? Who can judge this? Whithout religion can we know? Personaly I do not pay it much thought, I simply run by my internal meter if you will. I beleive that evil would be doing unto someone else what you would not have done unto yourself. For an act cannot truly be evil unless the intent is evil. You could do all manor of harm, but not be evil. I see it much like you do I suppose, except that I do not excuse harm done from stupidity any more than I do harm done from evil.

-Love does not lead to violence. It is purely a positive, harmless thing.-

I disagree. Certain types of love (yes I beleive in different types of love) can be dangerous of unto themselves. A person in love is unstable anyway that you look at it. Love is illogical, and because of this it makes people act in an illogical manor. A person acting in an illogical manor can do all means of harm even if they intend well. I am not arguing against love, just that it is not inherently good on all acounts.

-Bottomline.... Their emotional pleasure cannot be as vast and versatile as a good person who can accumulate much more through being able to romanticize or emotionally bond with others (and not just people, but also with animals, nature, etc.)-

I agree, but you would be more likely to survive a rough circumstance by not using morals, that was my arguement not that you would be happier. Also we are not all ruled by our emotions in the same way. Some people can function quite well without having happiness. Though I suspect you would not, which is not an insult by any means. I was arguing for survival vs. comfort and goodness.

-Plus, if you're evil, you're ruled by greed. How can you make objective judgements if you're always influenced by the same thing?-

I don't nescesarily agree with this. I think you are trying to make evil into a monolythic concept, as oposed to understanding it on a case by case basis. There are types of evil that have nothing to do with greed. And I beleive that I explained my type of evil to be more along the lines of apathy than greed anyway. I would be more likely to hide from the world than to dominate it (unlike deathsceptor, you can have the planet buddy :-p)

-Even Jesus himself hurt some people...ect-

Agreed but Jesus was extremely wise, making him not a viable figure for this debate. We would need someone very good but very very stupid to use as an example and I can't think of anyone who fits that bill. Perhaps that is because of what Kombat veteran said earlier. Perhaps it is very hard to be good and stupid at the same time. Perhaps being stupid is of unto itself a cause of evil. I am just brainstorming by the way not stating anything.

-Harming people doesn't necessarily make you evil-

Agreed, but does that make the person feel any better about being harmed? Will they say, "well she hurt me realy bad by running me over with her car, but at least she was just being stupid and not evil"? (I am not implying that you are stupid by the way, I was just trying to put you in the shoes)

-I'm being honest, and I'd rather be stupid but with a sane soul, than smart with a putrid, demented, disgusting one-

I beleive you, and I beleive that you are also a very rare person. As this is not the first time we have chatted I already know as much. I think you are somone that is so emotionaly driven that you are almost incapable of hurting others and surviving it. I also beleive that at some point in time you will likely be forced to compromise your morals to survive, unless you are very, very lucky. I actualy hope that never happens to you, if it helps any.

-And I like this thread, btw. Very stimulating for intellectuals, but it also shows how unfaithful so many people can be to goodness-

Well keep in mind that I do choose to be as good as I can be, and perhaps that is the duality of this beast. I intellectualy know all of these things that I am saying and yet still choose to help others despite it. I truly care about the world. I just know where my line is, my sellout point if you will. I have a cost, and that cost is not monitary but intellectual and interpersonal. I actualy value my freedom higher than anything else in this world, which I would say is also not a trait of a good person. I think that makes me fairly gray actualy. None the less it is who I am.


Just for fun:

-So you'd rather be a heartless maniac than someone dumb but capable of share a sweet cuddly night under moonlight with me?-

Boy you sure made that spicy
Hmm, I don't beleive that I ever said I would be a maniac, I think that is something different from evil. Maniac implies that you are out of controll and insane. I define evil and insane as two very different things. But if my options were to be a blubering, obnoxious puppy dog at your side, or an intelligent free spirited and wholely uncarring person then yes, I am sorry but I would choose the latter. Perhaps pride is my ultimate sin, then again I am not a Christian so it realy doesn't matter. However I must state that there is more at stake than just surviaval for this. There is also the entire natural order of the world. No other animal would even grasp the concept of evil, let alone be capable of doing it unto another. Yet still they kill, they destory, they consume. Why? Because it is survival of the fittest, and we are not exempt from this concept.

Well, I just wrote enough to give myself a migrane, so I will shut up and wait some more interesting points from all of you.

"Such things as please us, we denominate good, those which displease us, evil." Benedict de Spinoza

Evil is by definition, increase of entropy without beneficial gain.

Stupid.

Being the only smart person (well, relatively anywayz), I could easily manipulate people and get them to do stuff for me. Heck, I could rise up to be some kind of a God figure really.

Edit: I just noticed how stupid I was. I thought the thread was about if you would prefer to be stranded on an island where everyone is evil or where everyone is stupid. My bad.

If I had to be either evil or stupid, I would choose evil. Im already half way there.

Well Becareful because you say I am a WMD but also I am very much a sentient being. All sentient beings are prone to betrayal. Since I am a "WMD" and it grants me the power, Therefore I should be in command.


Don't forget the other people here can be used to our advantage and then disposed of when their usefulness is up.





Question, What real world philosophy I was using in this post and what is that philosophy equalient in the Star Wars universe?

Well, it seems sociopaths, if having to put them either on the good or evil side, would fall into or fit best in the evil side.


Can you give me an example of the a type of love would lead to evil? And it has to be love itself, not jealousy or another mix of feelings.


Happiness seems like a better fate. Perhaps the people that don't pursue love or happiness are the ones that have never really felt it, so they don't know what they're missing and therefore don't care about seeking it.


Well you said "Evil should be thought of as uncarring and or thoughtless of others especially in pursuit of your own personal gain."

That sounds like greed. Apathy can be a part of evil (and I'm sure it is most of the time) but so can being strongly emotional on some level (passionately hateful, angry, etc.).

The types of evil that have nothing to do with greed will most likely fall into the "immoral" category, I think, but can you give me examples of that too?


Paris Hilton is good and stupid. (lol). She's not evil and has a high social status.


That is true. However, an evil person is more likely to commit more crimes and wrongdoings like this than a stupid person. So looking at it as a whole picture and not just as one particular type of case, it's safe to say that harm evil people commit as a collective whole will weigh far more than a stupid person's. So, if you'd sum it up, it would be the same ratio (I hope this is the right word) as slicing someone's arm off as opposed to merely pinching someone. Know what I mean?


No, I've already hurt people because of greedy desires I've had, and I continue to do so.

Once, there was a white girl, very unfortunate and trashy-like but nice, who lived in my apartments. We were all little kids then. Anyway, she would always look and dress crappy, but this one particular time, she came outside wearing a pretty dress and looking nice and everything and she was excited about it. Well me and one of my friends lured her to an area where no one was watching and we started throwing dirt all over her dress, enjoying it. It was a no-big-deal, cheap thrill for us. She just stood there, looking confused while we were doing it.

I don't remember what happened afterward (like if she cried of felt awful), but GOD(!!!!) I can't get over the fact that I did that. How evil can I be? I mean she was such an innocent person and would always be falling on her face and getting hurt on her own (cuz like I said, she was unfortunate), so I feel so bad knowing that I made her life worse. I didn't feel sad then, but I do now. Terribly sad.

The difference between and evil person and I is that I would take any chance to make up for what I did to that girl. I'd treat her like a queen if I ever see her again.

I don't do such things anymore cuz I'm wiser now, emotionally and logically, but I still hurt people. I can't help it. We're all humans, you know? I think I would survive doing something horribly evil, but I would spend lots of time trying to make up for it. Like it would consume all my thoughts.

I also intentionally hurt people if I honestly feel they deserved to be hurt.


Maybe you say this because you haven't felt love at an extreme degree. Like if you had a child, would you sacrifice your freedom for him/her? Something like that, you know?


I'd like to address what you said about people ultimately being either predators or prey.

Being evil would not guarentee that you wouldn't be prey. What life throws at us doesn't always have to do with the darkness of goodness of our hearts. For example, there are some evil people who have experienced being prey and having torturous lifestyles, such as having abusive childhoods, etc.

Plus, unless you're the king of the jungle, you are subject to being prey one way or another. I'm sure that out of the millions Hitler abused and tormented, some of them were evil people.

So choosing to be stupid and good or smart and evil puts anyone at risk. And in that case, I think choosing a life of being able to deeply love and having long term happiness is a wiser decision unless you're sure that you're going to experience nothing but agony and never go to heaven.

Curious.... Say the afterlife were a sure thing and it was something exclusive to good people, would u choose to be stupid and good or smart and evil?

I

know it sounds immature, but humor me. Despite how idiotic I sounded for bringing up the star wars movie in the conversation it’s not without its value. Star wars is saturated with philosophical concepts and when you boil it down to its essential components you will see the most basic ideas of ethics and philosophy I was implying how evil can be done with the best of intentions and weather its fact or fiction the point is the same however you are right next time I’ll stick with fact. (In all fairness I did use ide amine as an example.) would you rather be feared or loved?

Allow me to throw a wrench into the gears here and ask if everyone defines evil the same way. I do believe in the existence of evil as a universal concept but some people are relativists and see good and evil as personal ideas that can change from person to person. So one man's evil is another man's good.

That is where you are mistaken. We are undoubtedly the most intelligent species (known), and because of this we have responsibility to rise above our primitive desires. Humans are also hardwired for morality that is the main difference between men and animal even a man with a severe retardation would recognize morality.
(Of course there are always exceptions.)

-Well, it seems sociopaths, if having to put them either on the good or evil side, would fall into or fit best in the evil side.-

That is inacurate they are capable of being both. They still have the ability to decide logically witch path they choose, they simply do not have the same compass that we do. A person could be a sociopath and never harm anyone, it would likely require training though. I think a person needs to stop looking at this in such a black and white manor to gain a deeper understanding.

-Can you give me an example of the a type of love would lead to evil? And it has to be love itself, not jealousy or another mix of feelings.-

I should have been more cautious with my word choice, I didn't mean evil so much as I meant that love can lead someone to doing a great deal of harm harm. My argument is still that love causes atachement and can greatly cloud the judgement, ESPECIALY ROMANTIC LOVE. I have seen people in love quit their jobs, disown their family, decide not to go to college, and generaly just make poor decisions. This is not to say that love is a bad thing, just that it can have a major downside if it is not logicaly aproached. I beleive a part of the problem here is that I see love in a much more scientific fashion than you do. You see it as the essence of good where as I see it as an emotion or pysiological reaction and nothing more. It is a pleasant emoiton, but another emotion none the less.

-Happiness seems like a better fate. Perhaps the people that don't pursue love or happiness are the ones that have never really felt it, so they don't know what they're missing and therefore don't care about seeking it.-

Perhaps, or perhaps not everyone thinks like you. It is quite possible that some people just do not see happiness as being what you consider it to be. To some people happines may be the pursiut of knowledge at the exclusion of social activety. I would be happier with a good book than a good girlfriend. How do you think the Buddhist monks of Southern China view their lives, or perhaps a better example would be the yogi of india. Do they see themselves as empty or full. Obviously morality comes into play here, but the point is that different people find happiness in different ways, and love is not an integral part of all of them.

-Well you said "Evil should be thought of as uncarring and or thoughtless of others especially in pursuit of your own personal gain."
That sounds like greed. Apathy can be a part of evil (and I'm sure it is most of the time) but so can being strongly emotional on some level (passionately hateful, angry, etc.).
The types of evil that have nothing to do with greed will most likely fall into the "immoral" category, I think, but can you give me examples of that too?-

This is true, perhaps my own definiton of evil was to specific. Though I would say that greed is the extreme of that very point, not the point itself. A person can seek their own goals and not be greedy so much as self absorber or egotistic. Greed is more kindred to wanting everything you ever imagine I think. An example: O.K. How about this. Immagine for a moment you are a lone farmer living in the plains of Kansas and the only way for you to continue to have a successful crop is to use a chemcial that will polute the earth and make your lands infertile in years to come. This will not happen in your lifetime, but it will happen much latter. Now also consider the fact that you will starve if you do not do this. Is it so easy to say that you would not proceed if there were no other imaginable options? This is what I mean by my cost. Also it is apathy of sorts because you simply do not pride the well being of the world over your own survival. How many people could actualy choose the good path here? To make it more complicated imagine that you have children whom you love and also wish to see them survive. This is a combination of love and apathy I suspect. It is a moral dillema that points out the very nature of good vs. evil not being so simplistic as some would beleive. I have a problem with people viewing good and evil in a way that revolves around there own beleifs without consideration of mitigating factors I guess you could say.

-Paris Hilton is good and stupid. (lol). She's not evil and has a high social status.-

Well that is a good example, though I am not entirely sure she is a good person. She may not be evil, but I don't think I would say that she is good. I would say that to be good you need to be a little better than average, you need to strive to help others and do go. She is nuetral in my opinion. Frankly I think she has done much harm to the world though, especialy to her own family. She certainly has shown signs of greed, lust, envy, sloth, and wrath to more than average degrees. Which, by Christian terms at least, are evil concepts.

-So, if you'd sum it up, it would be the same ratio (I hope this is the right word) as slicing someone's arm off as opposed to merely pinching someone. Know what I mean?-

I think you are greatly downplaying the amount of damage that stupid people have on the earth. Remember back to our global warming debate and you will see this. Perhaps it is the evil people who create alot of situations which damage the wolrd, but it is usualy stupid, ignorant, and apathetic people that allow them to gain power and become strong.

-I think I would survive doing something horribly evil, but I would spend lots of time trying to make up for it. Like it would consume all my thoughts.-

This is realy my whole point. It takes a certain aweful type of strength to decide to survive instead of deciding to be good. Everyone has a certain moral value and at some point they ywould sacrifice it. My line is simply at the point of lossing my intelligence or freedom. Yours perhaps is more emotionaly based or would come at greater personal cost. It is not a matter of good and evil so much as a matter of interpersonal values and justification.

-I also intentionally hurt people if I honestly feel they deserved to be hurt-
I didn't mean to say that you were an angel so much as I meant that you obviously derive great emotional pleasure from doing good, which is more rare than you may realize. I suspect that you are one of the few people that are actualy good by choice, and not out of debt or fear. Be careful though, it sounds like you are prone to wrath

-Maybe you say this because you haven't felt love at an extreme degree. Like if you had a child, would you sacrifice your freedom for him/her? Something like that, you know?-

Perhaps, but this is why I do not want children. It also speaks to the argument of love clouding judgement. If I had a child would it change everything I beleive? It might, but at what cost? How would my career fair? Could I ever actualy reach my goal of becoming a prominent ecologist? Not to be arrogant but I am considered to be amid the top 5 % of people in the world as far as I.Q. (as a few of you people responding to this thread likely also are) and problem solving skills are concerned (certainly I have met others far beyond me, and I do not pretend to be the most educated person alive, but intelligence is certainly my strength) I do not mean this to be a way to toot my own horn, but I actualy have FAITH that I am someone who can have a resonable amount of intellectual impact on the scientific world, from the point of view of a macro ecologist. Every test I have taken, and every professor I have worked with has affirmed this. Again I am sorry if this sounds arrogant, I am actualy very uncomfortable with saying it, but I thought it would elaborated my point a bit. I am fully capable of admitting there are people beyond my intellgence, it is simply a matter of being tested and knowing where I stand. Moving on......I beleive that such a sacrifice would cost the whole world, not just myself. After all what if I end up being part of a research team that helps combat global pollution or perhaps the extintion of a key predatorial sepcies or botanical specimen. I would step up and sacrifice if I had a child (because very little angers me more than deliquent parenting) but I do everything in my power to avoid having to be in that situation. As of right now I never want children and I am 27 so I doubt I am going to change that aspect of myself much. It is possible but unlikely. I have actauly avoided having sex as of the last couple of years to avoid having children, if that tells you anything about the strength of my beleifs.

-Being evil would not guarentee that you wouldn't be prey-

I agree, and I beleive I have already adressd this. "This is not to say that all predators are evil or that all prey is good"- myself- I do beleive however that anyone who is purely good or altruistic could not be a true predator.

-So choosing to be stupid and good or smart and evil puts anyone at risk.-

Rememeber that I never said being stupid would make you good in this ficticious experiement, just that you would not be evil, there is a difference. I think certainly there must be a grey morality that can be used. I would think most people do use it actualy. I agree though that being evil would not make you immortal or immune, but your chance of survival is certainly better if you view the world in a synical and moraly flexible way.

-Curious.... Say the afterlife were a sure thing and it was something exclusive to good people, would u choose to be stupid and good or smart and evil?-

This is a loaded question and I am unsure if you are aware of the implications of it. Yes I would choose heaven, but here is why. Because I would be aware of the punishment for my crimes and therefore would only be doing so for a selfish reason, to get to heaven, not because I wanted to be good. Also the fear of hell would play in the same fashion. This is sort of what I was getting at before. If you beleive in an afterlife you are simply choosing to be good to go to the better part of it, not because you truly want to be good. It is nothing more than crime an punishment. In my mind only those who do not beleive or do not consider the after can truly good purely for the sake of it and not for some personal gain.

I pose the opposite question to you. If it was certain that there was no afterlife would you truly be concerned for your actions, or would you instead seek to enjoy every pleasure of this world without regard for morality and decency? This is not to say that you would not know love, but that you would be selfish and take whatever joy you could in your short time on earth.

But animals can learn.

And what about dolphins who are as as intelligent as 7 or 9-year-olds? Dolphins can rationalize.

ahhh I am hit fro mseveral angles

Let me try to adress each and then others can do the same.

TTT-Allow me to throw a wrench into the gears here and ask if everyone defines evil the same way. I do believe in the existence of evil as a universal concept but some people are relativists and see good and evil as personal ideas that can change from person to person. So one man's evil is another man's good.-

You are very correct and this is one of the points I was trying to address but you summed it up much better than I did.

Who is the ultimate judge of good and evil amongst humans. (do not consider god, I said amongst humans)

KombatVeteran-I know it sounds immature, but humor me. Despite how idiotic I sounded for bringing up the star wars movie in the conversation it’s not without its value. Star wars is saturated with philosophical concepts and when you boil it down to its essential components you will see the most basic ideas of ethics and philosophy I was implying how evil can be done with the best of intentions and weather its fact or fiction the point is the same however you are right next time I’ll stick with fact. (In all fairness I did use ide amine as an example.) would you rather be feared or loved?-

I don't think you sounded idiotic, I just think it cheapens your point which is very valid. I would rather be loved than feared yes. However I would rather be respected than to be either.

-That is where you are mistaken. We are undoubtedly the most intelligent species (known), and because of this we have responsibility to rise above our primitive desires. Humans are also hardwired for morality that is the main difference between men and animal even a man with a severe retardation would recognize morality.
(Of course there are always exceptions.) -

I think you are being closed minded if you decide that this oppinion is the only truth. This sounds more like something that you have been taught than something that you have decided. There is still a great degree of debate amongst psychologist as to rather man is good or evil by nature and for you to proclami to know the answer is quite pretentious. I see it differently than you. I think that being of superior intelligence to animals does not make us above the ways of natural order. In fact I think one of mans greatest flaws is our self imposed superiority to other animals. I beleive that we must follow this order for our own species to survive, as per the rules of nature.

P.S. there is actualy some debate amongst zoologists, and psychologists as to which species is the most intelligent. Other primates have almost all the congnitive abilities that we do,(and possibly some we do not understand) and several marine animal could have abilities beyond our own. The latter simply do not have the thumbs to create such things that we do, or the vocal cords to express their abilities. Man is the most organized, productive, and vocal animal on earth, that much is for sure.

myself -No other animal would even grasp the concept of evil, let alone be capable of doing it unto another.-

This is inacurate and I should not have said it. There are several types of animals that actual are noted for harming others for reasons that seem to be nothing beyond "pleasure." Dolphins especialy are known for this trait.

Sorry I am typing so much, this is just the most fun I have had in a long time

Edit: K.V-i do not belive Dolphins have morality. Dolphins still act on impulse/desire and mostly instinct more so than people- I don not beleive you are qualified to make that observation. Much has beened learned about orcas as of late and much more is yet unknown. The brightest marine biologists on earth do not know, and neither do we.

i do not belive Dolphins have morality. Dolphins still act on impulse/desire
and mostly instinct more so than people

Ditto